March 26, 2009 5:44 pm

"He (Curry) said everything went great," Ross said. "He really got along with the coach well and really likes their system. He just looks forward to whatever team takes him to be a leader and an impact player."

Seattle linebackers coach Zerick Rollins conducted the series of drills in about a half-hour workout, according to Ross.

The Seahawks also plan on hosting Curry for a visit at the team’s Renton facility in early April, Ross said.

Curry already has taken a visit to Detroit, and along with Seattle plans to visit Kansas City and Cleveland, Ross said. Curry also has a private workout set up with the Chiefs and Browns.

Curry is considered by many draft experts as the top linebacker in the draft.

Seattle had $20.7 million in salary tied up in its starting linebackers with Peterson in the fold, but gained about $4 million in cap space by dealing Peterson. The Seahawks, however, may not want to put themselves in the same position by drafting Curry.

Rob Rang, senior analyst for nfldraftscout.com, has Seattle taking Curry with the team’s No. 4 overall pick in the draft. Rang compared Curry to Peterson in terms of his athleticism and his ability to move in space. And Rang believes Kansas City, who has the No. 3 overall pick, may not select Curry because he is not a dominant pass rusher and would not fit in the team’s potential switch to a 3-4 as an outside backer.

"I think he would absolutely be a consideration because he would fill a huge need," Rang said about Seattle selecting Curry. "He’s the best player on the board. He comes from a big-time school. And he’s an incredible character guy."

"I think that if he’s on the board than the only reason Seattle wouldn’t take him is that they just don’t want to invest that kind of money in the linebacker position, and that’s a possibility."

Blog search

Twitter

About

Gregg Bell joined The News Tribune in July 2014. Bell had been the director of writing for the University of Washington's athletic department for four years. He was the senior national sports writer in Seattle for The Associated Press from 2005-10, covering the Seahawks in their first Super Bowl season and beyond. He's also been The Sacramento Bee's beat writer on the Oakland Athletics and Raiders. The native of Steubenville, Ohio, is a 1993 graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., and a 2000 graduate of the University of California, Berkeley's Graduate School of Journalism.

At least investing that much money in Curry means your paying someone to play. To draft someone like Stafford means you’re paying someone to NOT play. I agree with Curry or Crabtree. Lets get someone who will contribute immediately. But seriously, I see the Hawks trading down. It’s their MO.

From what little I’ve seen of either Curry or Crabtree, they both look good. Curry was very impressive in pics from the combine, you could just see “it”. I’m just trusting that TR and JM pick the right one for us. Oh yeah, and no QB’s in the first round, ever again.

Hawthorne does not look to have the ability to do much of anything in coverage. His special skills seem to be his ability to hold his own against OL who are coming at him and blow up plays. He does not seem to have the potential to be an every down LB. Also, his skill set, in what we saw last year mainly in the pre-season, is so that he definitely projects to be an inside type of LB — not OLB, as JP was/is. I like Hawthorne. I see him as a run stuffing LB on obvious run downs/short yardage situations and a contributor on special teams. That’s it. I don’t see him as a replacement starter on a team who has Super aspirations.

I’m still not in favor of Curry, but am not against it as much as I used to be. The reason is that we got something for JP (a DT/DE). Now, if we draft Curry — it won’t be a total wash where we dropped a guy and gained a guy at the same position and that’s it. In the process we helped solidify the DL and picked up the first pick in the 5th round.

I think both sides are correct in the Ruskell trade up/trade down scenario.

He loves trading down to get more picks, as he did in the 1st round in ’05 and ’08. However, he loves trading up when he sees a player that he wants like Tatupu and Carlson.

ibew191 – I don’t think Monroe performs better than a healthy Wahle in ’09 at LG and with either Willis or Lock starting at RG — that makes it tough for Sims to see the field.

I have been against Monroe for a long time but if drafting him means that there is zero chance that Rob Sims sees the field in ’09 (whereas he would have been a starter) — then I’m all for it. That guy is a worthless pile.

I think the pick is going to be either one of the lineman or the hybrids (DE/LB) in Curry and Orakpo. I did see the interview with Orakpo the other day and kind of have mixed feelings now. Don’t really know why. I wouldn’t mind Crabtree, but wonder if Ruskell will take this big of a chance on him since he’s been injured. Stafford is kind of gut wrenching…don’t really want that decision. I know Matt is getting older and more injury prone, but if he’s recovered and stays upright, could probably play the next 3-4 years. Look around the league how many “older” QBs are still playing. I hope Detroit makes it moot.

I’m wondering if Jenkins is possibly still in the mix?

According to Casserly on NFL network, he claims that M. Jenkins is best suited for the Tampa 2 scheme…which we plan to implement starting this year. Him and Trufant would give us a great 1-2 punch against the Cards and their big WRs.

I know everyone wants to knock his 40, but if he’s our #2…does it matter? Tru can still cover the elites, while Jenkins gives us a great #2, big run support and could eventually transition to Safety like many have already suggested.

He played at a big time program, won many awards, makes big plays, returns the ball and is said to be a great leader. I was leaning towards Orakpo, now I’m not so sure.

Can you imagine how fun it must be to speculate for a living and get paid for your thoughts?

For QB look at Mike Reilly in the 5-7.
Strengths:
Adequate height and bulk with large hands…Nice touch, timing and accuracy…Able to buy time and make plays with his feet…Smart with a good football IQ…Knows how to read a defense and go through his progressions…Takes care of the ball…Makes good decisions…Leader.

Weaknesses:
Does not have a great arm…Throws a mediocre deep ball…Needs some work with his mechanics and delivery…Worked mostly out of the shotgun in college…Did not play against top competition…Upside?

Perfect WCO QB with that few years behind Hass, he reminds me a lot of Matt + he is from Central Washington and he will not get as much money as a #4 QB and will enter with a lot less expectations, love him

Curry is the Best Player hands down this year. If he’s there at #4, we take him, regardless of putting a lot of money at the LB position.

The thing is, we haven’t signed Leroy to a long term contract and may walk after this season. Heck, if he signs that tender, he might be traded, we don’t know. But having the best player in the draft regardless of need fall to us? I would rather take the best player, not the need… that’s what Free agency is all about. The draft is to build your foundation, the FA is to fill holes and gaps.

We all know that most players who were supposedly the best player in their draft “hands down” usually never became the best player from that draft. The key is finding the guys who are the best players, not who “experts” said should go where.

Don’t agree with the best player, never the safest picks (as much as you can predict that) and i do not want Crabtree, i do not think he fits our scheme right now Jenkins is probably our guy but #4 is a little early especially if “but if he’s our #2…does it matter? Tru can still cover the elites, while Jenkins gives us a great #2, big run support and could eventually transition to Safety like many have already suggested.” this is the scenario who says he can play the safety and spending our 4th overall pick on a guy that’s just our 2nd, but i agree right now + i think Jenkins’ game speed is better than his 40 indicates

Mike Reilly is a great pick up in the middle rounds. If you watched the combine, the only QB that Knapp was working with was Reilly. The knock on him is his throwing motion, it’s kind of unorthodox, which may cause his inaccuracies. Something that can be taught.

“Something that can be taught.” In the 1-3 years behind Hass, i really love this pick so much, Matt in his prime (we’ll see if he is still at that level) was exactly like this reoprt says about Reilly: Nice touch, timing and accuracy…Able to buy time and make plays with his feet…Smart with a good football IQ…Knows how to read a defense and go through his progressions…Takes care of the ball…Makes good decisions…Leader.
Make that pick + Brandon Gibson at WR (who is a great WCO receiver) in the later rounds and i’m happy!

Part of my reasoning for drinking the Moreno kool-aid is because of my previous post. Just b/c he isn’t supposed to go this high — I think that history will have proven that it was a good pick.

If some team would have tried taking Hutch at 3 or 4… they would have been made fun of because his was “just a guard”… however, the team that drafted him would have gotten the last laugh because he is/was so good and would have been deserving of going that high. If there were a redraft today — I guarantee he would go top 5 in his draft.

A caller had a great question on NFL radio yesterday. He was a lions fan, and posed this question:

If the lions like a player who doesn’t project until late in the first round, could they negotiate with his agent and say “Look, your guy projects to make 10 million dollars getting drafted in the late first-round – but we will pay him 17 million and make him the first overall pick. He gets nearly twice the money, and we make him a media sensation overnight.”

This way, the Lions save money and get the guy they want.

The answer they gave him (they being the hosts on Opening Drive on Sirius) was that it was an original idea that they had never thought of, but that most likely after it was agreed upon prior to the draft you would have to rely on the agent not being a douche lol..

It got me thinking, why couldn’t the Seahawks do the same thing? I would bet my entire life savings (which is down roughly 50% in the last year, ugh) that we won’t take a guy like Moreno with the 4th overall pick. Not a chance. Forget it, BobbyK… But maybe we like him, and we offer to take him that high at a discounted price? I know that the team picking first can begin negotiations prior to the draft, but is there something stopping us from doing the same? I would imagine it may create a conflict, but have never heard of an official rule barring it from happening. It’s something to think about.

If we like Everette Brown, but feel his range is more like 10-20 in the draft, couldn’t we draft him four and pay him 10-20 money?

It never hurts to think outside the box. In this draft class, we may be forced to.

“he is from Central Washington” Not gonna happen TR doesn’t draft small school guys

Hawkcrazy you put a little to much faith in MT he is not an “elite cover corner” he IS the best cover corner the hawks have they could use some help here. Jenkins makes plays and fits TR draft mold so maybe we all get a surprise and the hawks take him at #4. Jenkins has defeciencies in his technique and raw footspeed so IMO he is also not an elite cover corner. So again if Stafford or curry are available hawks take em. If neither then look for them to trade down. All there moves in the offseason lean towards a win now strategy so look for them to select the player who best helps that stategy

Am i wrong when i say that the new rookie HC (Mora a Seahawks rookie HC) gets a lot to say in their first draft so maybe the small school thing aren’t going to be AS important if Mora loves him, or listens to Greg Knapp who has spend some time with Reilly. Reilly fits the Smart with a good football IQ and a leader Timmay loves that so i think we can take him

If we can get decent value for Hill and replace him with Curry I would love that move. At franchise tag $ for Hill we might save more money (in ’09) overall at LB position with a move such as this, we’d get what nearly everyone is calling the overall top player in the draft, we’d get younger, we’d prevent having to go through the L.Hill situation again at the end of this year.

I’m still convinced that Curry’s going to be gone. But if Rob Rang is right, I’ll be happy for us to grab Curry and I’ll send a muffin basket to Rob for doubting his expertise.

191 – That’s funny b/c I have thought the same thing. I’d much rather have Moreno on a 5 year $25 million deal than I would Monroe on a 5 year $50 million deal. That would save dough on the cap and would enable us to sign someone else or do a better job of keeping our own in future years.

I don’t see the point in freeing money tied up in one position, linebacker, and then turning around and putting a bunch of money back into it again. I don’t know how accurate this evaluation is, but the guy says Curry won’t be able to play weakside linebacker in the Tampa 2. If that’s the case is Hill able to be the weakside ‘backer, and Curry always a strongside or inside linebacker?

Interesting idea about making a deal with Moreno’s agent. The problem I see with the radio questioner’s scenario is would a player and his agent do it, knowing that it screws guys at the same or similar position taken after him. If a guy is a RB, for example, or a quarterback, his bargaining position, the amount of money and guaranteed money he’ll can reasonably expect to get, is determined by how much someone at the same position taken ahead of him gets. If the top pick is signed for a lower amount in that scenario, a guy who plays the same position is not in a position to ask for more even though he would normally get it. Such a player and agent could become a pariah of sorts.

Just my opinion but I think Jim Mora has zero influence on draft picks or free agent signings as long as Rusekll is here. He owes his position to Ruskell, that’s his patron, he wouldn’t even have been secondary coach on the Seahawks if Ruskell wasn’t the GM; and questioning decisions or pressing for players that are not someone Ruskell wants is not in his job description. Holmgren had the clout to do that, Mora will get a pat on the head and get told to sit at the kiddies table and be quiet.

Phil Loadholt is one of the worst offensive linemen in this draft. He sucks as a left tackle and maybe, might be a decent run blocker on the right side. I’ll be surprised if he even gets drafted before the 5th round. It’s amazing that people like Rang project him as a late 1st round pick, he just flat out sucks.

I still want Monroe or Oher at 4. If not them, then Moreno, and if not one of those 3 then Stafford (presuming Detroit doesn’t take him). I’m even warming up to the idea of Sanchez at 4, but it’s way down my list. Anything but Crabtree. I have no problem with a quarterback taken at 4 sitting for a year and learning the offense. That used to be the way it’s done, especially with a team with a 34 year old starter who has a bulging disc in his back that tends to press on a nerve to his leg. Who knows how many hits it will take (especially if the LT/offensive line is not addressed again) before this injury reoccures?

For what it’s worth, here’s how I see it. The top 3 picks will most likely go Stafford, Smith and Curry. The ‘Hawks are then left with the so called also-rans. I prefer Monroe of that group, and would be stoked to get him. However, if any one of those top three fall to the Seahawks, (this will not happen, but you never know) they must take him. If they have an opportunity for ANY of those 3 players, that will be their pick. As I see it, there are no other reasonable draft scenarios. (All the wildly unrealistic trade options that have been detailed here, not withstanding.)

We annouce that we have made contract offers to 2 players, if neither of those accept our offer — then we take Monroe at #4 and deal with the ridiculous salary demands of high picks these days.

Under the table, we offer Moreno 5 years, $25 million and Everrett Browne the same contract. If either of those accept (or whoever accepts first) they become our #1 and we get an important player at a much less reduced rate.

FYI – The #9 pick last year signed a 6 year contract for almost $24 million. That’s a lot different than the #4 pick, which was 6 years and $60 million.

Looked at TR drafts from when he was in charge of draft for hawks and he doesn’t pick Div 2 guys the exception Leanard Weaver was an UNDRAFTED FA. Honestly I’m beginning to wonder if his selection criteria/philosophy needs to change cuz since 2005 he has Zero pro bowlers drafted and few quality starters 1st Kelly jennings(demoted), 2nd Daryl Tapp(starter or BU?), 2nd Brando Mebane(solid), 2nd Josh Wilson(average but love his competiveness), 1st Lawrence Jackson(starter or BU?), 2nd John Carlson(so far his best choice since 2005), and 2 guys who will probably start this year due to roster moves 5th Owen Scmitt and 7th Brandon Couto. Don’t you look for 1 starter in each draft and depth overall? Does anybody think TR is delivering in the draft? looks like he fills from FA where he has had some success which is what you should do for holes. For a guy who says he wants the foundation of his team to be built from the draft I’m not seeing the results.

My first question would be: what’s in it for the player? Why accept less money to go at 4 only to be guaranteed getting top 10 money? I don’t think there’s an agent in todays world that would encourage his client to agree to being selected higher for less money.

just saw Bobbyk comment I was researching my previuous post and I agree with your food for thought, but that would set a precedent that I just don’t see in an era of give me mine and as much or more than I can get. To many selfish people out there

Other agents would HATE the agent that made that deal. His client would love him, and GM’s and owners would love him. Last I checked, agents don’t negotiate with other agents. From a player’s standpoint, they look at it and go, “Hey, that agent just got that player an extra 8 or 9 million on his rookie contract, and put his face on the cover of USA today.”

Selfish? What do you think this is all about? These players aren’t killing themselves in the gym everyday and busting ass on the field so they can settle for less. And it works both ways, by the way. Players can be broken off at almost any time, with zero compensation. There is no way around the fact that the higher the pick, the more it’s going to cost. And while were on this, was there ever an era where people didn’t do everything in their power to better their situations? Do you accept more responsibility and work while offering your employer a pay cut at your job?

Dukeshire, what do you mean what is in it for the player? If they target a guy projected to go in the late first round, we are talking a substantially lower amount of money than #4 overall. Now you are telling that player you will take him 4th overall and pay him more than what he would make if he waited until the end of the first round. It’s a win-win for the player and the team drafting him. Imagine the media attention that would get, for one, and an extra 8 million dollars or so can go a long way.

Something has to give with these rookie contracts. I am sure the players union will address it (it’s going to be easier for them to throw college kids under the bus than themselves) but maybe that actually works against this scenario – with agents knowing this could be there last huge payday representing these first round picks…

To the person who said that people are too selfish to agree to this, their selfishness is exactly what we are depending on. On one hand, you are telling them they can wait and go to a super-bowl contender at the end of the first round for 10 million, or they can sign with a rebuilding team at the top of the round for 20 million. See my point?

If we don’t draft Moreno, he will probably go somewhere between 10-20.

For the record, the #10 pick last year got 5 year $19 million contract.

For the record, the #20 pick last year got a 5 year $14 million contract.

The player would love to get 5 years $25 million if he were taken by the Seahawks. The agent may get flack from other agents, but his #1 responsibility is to his client. And this would be best for Moreno. Besides, agents aren’t exactly nice to each other when they are competing to get clients. They stab each other in the backs every chance they get.

What’s in it for the player? More money than he would have gotten if he weren’t picked at #4 (even though he took less money than last year’s #4 pick got).

I found this, which I thought was interesting: “For the 12 months ended Feb. 29, the union earned a record $34.85 million on revenue of $160 million, according to the union’s 2008 report….The NFLPA formed its licensing subsidiary, Players Inc. (now known as NFL Players), in 1994, taking group player licensing away from the league. In fiscal 2008, licensing revenue represented 51 percent of total NFLPA revenue”

I’m not sure how much of that is derived from jersey sales, and how much individual players clear on the sale of their own jerseys.

Snydro / Bobby – I get the fact that a player would be glad to accept more money that he would likely get if he he were to agree to a deal like that. Perhaps I was a bit short sided.

In all honesty, after today’s dialogue, I’d rather get a signed player at a lower cost than invest $60 million (over 6 years) into someone. Either way, both players are a risk, as there are no “sure things.”

Hows about Rhett Bomar or Nate Davis in the 3rd. I think either of them could work well in our offense given some time to learn from Matt. NO to Mike Rielly he didnt play against any good comp, I would know I had to watch him murder the late WWU \Football team twice a year.

watsoni you comment don’t make that much sense, Reilly didn’t play against top competition, well Bhomar at sam houston st. is not really top competition is it? + …Needs to work on his accuracy…Will take chances and throw some interceptions…Has a little too much faith in his arm at times…Can come off as cocky…Durability may be an issue…Has run into some trouble off the field so character and judgment is a concern.
Not a WCO player, with off the field problems, he will neer end up in Seattle if he does, i’ll eat BobbyK’s underwear!

Jacd you first sentence don’t make good sense either. His off the field issues were getting money for hours not worked, im sure many college players do this, he just got caught. And he could learn much better accuracy sitting under Matt. Also, Sam Houston St. is at least Div 1 football unlike CWU. The best team central played was eastern. Bomar played well against texas am and was supposed to be Oklahomas QB until his issue.

But if we think the way Ruskell hopefully used to think, as soon he see’s this is a small school and Off field issue (I don’t even think Ruskell cares what the details are, the man don’t usually won’t touch a player like that) Bhomar is not bad, but in our system i think Rielly is and will be better, Ruskell probably would pick a guy who wasn’t Kicked Off of Oklahoma for Breaking NCAA Rules

Mike Rielly will never be a starter in the NFL. He played against weak weak schools in the GNAC. Dixie St. and Alaska Fairbanks dont normally field the best Defenses. And Rielly almost always was in shotgun, unless they were handing the ball of to uw flunkie Hasty. Iv watched this kid i know what he can do. Breaking Kitnas records at CWU doesnt mean that much.

A little background on my selfish comment in your scenario player A is told he will go in the late first round odds are to a decent team. Player A is approched by the team picking #4 in draft and they say we will offer you ? money if you sign with us now at pick #4( ? = what later pick?) It’s all speculation as to where the guy will be picked “later” Do you gurantee all the money? And if player A is a bust what then? You’re on the hook for his entire contract or you dump him which I agree is true and happens often in the NFL. Most guys are gonna say pick me at #4 and negotiate later = selfish i.e. get the most they can for themselves which is what probably anybody would do. A side note I am a carpenter so YES I do work the same job with the same/more/less responsibility for sometimes more and sometimes less money.

Guys, on the topic of draft him higher than projected and pay him lower…

The market sets the price. If someone is good enough to be picked that high they will be paid the market value.

The same in any business. When all the companies are busy they charge more for their services. When things are very slow they cut profits to get work.

If the draft class is talent poor, the players benifit. If the class is talent rich, the teams benefit. No agent in his right mind will agree to taking less than market value for any player. In predraft negotiations they would simply argue that if the team does not think their client is worth the market value, they should not draft them. Risk and reward. Both the player and team risk by waiting and one of them will be rewarded for their risk.

The stock market is low right now. Should you buy or sell? Either the buyer or seller of that stock will be proven right based on their ability to acurately predict future market value. Who has the biggest brass ones?

Palerydr – Sometimes, we all do. But if your labor union went in to negotiations for you and told your employer you would accept less money as someone who is your relative equal, that would be foolish. If that particular player demands to negotiate after the selection is made, they would be under no obligation to select him. If that player was likely to go late in the first or early second round and he was offered #10 money, then he ought to accept the deal, as Snydro and Bobby point out. I will say that the player needs to be damn sure he has no chance to be selected higher than the contract he is slotted to get.

(I hate these type of hypothetical, what if, arguments. So thankfully, you won’t have to endure many of them from me.)

I agree with doubledink on this one. The draft position is what’s going to determine the contract, which is going to be based on last year’s contracts. No agent worth his commission would allow a player to get less than others get/got in that same spot.

But what we are proposing is that you take a guy who projects late first/early second. Maybe Alex Mack or Donald Brown etc.. Someone who acknowledges their place in the draft (these draftees call into NFL radio all the time and the hosts ask them where their agent projects them to be drafted, so they have a good idea) and you tell them “look, we will draft you #4, but we will not pay you #4 money. If you wait to get drafted later on, you will probably make X amount of dollars. We will more than better that. We will pay you an additional 8 million than you would have received had you waited.”

Why would the player turn it down? Why would his agent turn it down? The NFL has no problem with it, that’s for sure. Roger Goodell was on NFL radio today talking about how the rookie contract thing is out of control and is completely unfair, and that will be the FIRST thing they negotiate about when they sit down at the table to discuss the CBA.

LOL….I had another thought, which doesn’t happen often. Say that they COULD pull this off. What effect would it have on the remainder of the draft class? Would #5 get less since our #4 did? Would later picks, who are rated higher, want more money?

OutSydeDog, you are grossly overestimating the ethics of a sports agent. They only care about one thing – MONEY.

A lot of these draftees have agents who solely represent them. This is their chance for a payday. Not every player has a Drew Rosenhaus (thank god). In fact, most don’t.

People keep saying, “they would be stupid to take less money.”

The point is, they aren’t taking less money, they are taking more money. But if you haven’t gathered that by now, then you’re hopeless.

And for the record, there are many variables beyond draft slot that dictate value, including the player’s position. There is nothing set in stone. They talked about it at length on NFL radio today and brought it up to the commissioner. With the economy the way it is, he feels this years class should make LESS than last years. There is no reason a team should feel obligated to pay these enormous salaries to unproven players. These agents can all go back to their clients and say, “hey, guess you are sitting out for a year. Sorry.”

Goodell said that it is backwards that a team can go 0-16 and essentially get punished for it. He said the purpose of the draft is to reward the weaker teams, like in the NBA where everyone wants the top spot. It just isn’t that way right now. No one would trade into top spot this year for anything…

Rookie contracts are the worst, but the whole thing is out of whack. I don’t see why they don’t establish a pay scale throughout the league. Start with draft position, then free agents. From there, they receive raises for every year of service. Then, merit bonuses are earned for performance on the field, and grading out against those at the same positions across the league. If it were done this way, the best players having their best years will be that year’s top earners. Every player in the league would sure be extra motivated to excel, every year. The best part is that rookies who haven’t done a thing don’t get an instant fortune.

I don’t think the Hawks would do any type of deal at #4 for Mack, Chung, etc. Those guys pretty much know their value.

I think the Mack camp pretty much knows there’s a chance he could go in the early 20s. But I also think they understand a worst case scenario where they could go in the middle of the 2nd round.

I think the Chung people hope he can slide into the first round. I think they are also realistic that there’s a chance he could be there when the Seahawks pick in the 3rd round. However, I think they expect that they will be getting a call sometime in the 2nd round.

I don’t think there’s any way the Hawks would negotiate with either of these at #4 because they wouldn’t want to tip their hand at who they want and are targeting with their 2nd rounder.

A guy like Moreno, Jenkins, or Browne are players who will most likely go between picks 10-20 (although I could see Browne going to GB at #9). This is the type of player I could see us signing at #4 for an obvious discount. There’s no way possible either of these guys could somehow slide to us in the 2nd round.

All I know is that if I am Moreno and I get a 6 year, $30 million offer from the Seahawks at #4 and say ‘no’ and then I don’t get drafted until pick #16 by the Chargers (last year #16 got 6 years and $16 million) I would be pissed.

I am curious to know what some of you Monroe people think. Would you rather have Moreno at 6 years and $30 million or would you rather go with Monroe at 6 years and $60 million? Most may have Monroe as the higher rated player, but at the same time you have to consider how many other FAs (our own and other teams) we could sign over 6 years by having an additional $30 million of cap space available.

I think it’s an interesting question and hope Ruskell can pull something like this off.

We have all talked about how stupid the rookie salary schedule is. It makes no sense that last year the #4 pick got 6 years and $60 million while the #9 pick got 6 years and almost $24 million. That’s a big friggin’ difference. Stupid. Very stupid.

If the Hawks wanted a player that could be had later in the draft and didn’t care if they didn’t receive any value for trading back they can always pass until the player they want is at the slot they want to pay him for. Then the Hawks wouldn’t have to trust an agent to negotiate in good faith!

Yes. They could. Say they wanted Browne or Moreno… they could wait until one of them were picked and then have the card ready to IMMEDIATELY give to the commish (or someone could pass them)… If we picked Moreno at #9, it would be kind of funny to give him 6 years and $24 million instead of 6 for $60 mil.

A couple of cuts he makes reminds me of Curt Warner and his cutting ability and ouside of Barry Sanders I have never seen many players who could cut like that.

The dude on the Seahawks draft blog and I think alike. I just read his comment about Moreno being a RB and they don’t last as long as other positions:

Our resonse to that? Yes. You’re right. But while certain positions suck for 2-3 years while they are “developing” (and the team is paying them millions to suck), RBs normally come in and have an immediate impact in the running game. Yes, it may take them a little time to adjust to pass protection but it takes no time to make an impact as a runner.

Now, while Stafford could very well turn out to be the best long-term prospect for us to draft — I don’t think Ruskell has the job security to take him because he must win now, in this last year of his contract, or there are no guarantees that he will be around long enough to see him (Stafford) succeed if he doesn’t win in ’09. He is coming off a 4-12 season and he must get an impact player and RBs/LBs usually take the least amount of time to develop.

I am more convinced/optimistic than ever that it’s possible Moreno could be taken by us at #4. And in 5 years we will all talk about what a great Ruskell pick it was — even though some will compain about it on draft day.

(I hate these type of hypothetical, what if, arguments. So thankfully, you won’t have to endure many of them from me.) AMEN to that Dukeshire! IMO everyone posting here has great thought provoking commentary but its all speculation and what if…

The NFL payscale is completely out of whack no way guys who have never played a down in the league should be getting the money they get when so many of them never become solid NFL players let alone all pro. Slot guys #1 pick gets X dollar amount and everbody from that point forward gets X dollar amount in descending order. Individual bonuses would also have to be monitered so that no hidden salaries get adjusted up. Cut down on hold outs. In my trade apprentices don’t make journeyman pay from day1 they have to pay there dues prove they can do the job and then get rewarded for performance. I’m sure many of you had to work for what you got even if you went to college you still had to put in the time of learning the basics of your major then on to the real world.

As for a rating system that grades players on whatever statistics you decide on be careful as you can promote “stat guys” who care only about there own numbers. Individual play(i.e. playing for your numbers at the expense of the team) in the team sport of football could ruin things for a franchise in 1 quick hurry

Bobbyk I agree with you 100% about TR having to win now this will be his 5th draft and most likely final 1 if he doesn’t get an impact player who can help the team right away so maybe I’ll take a sip of the Moreno kool-aid but he will still be running behind the same line. Maybe TR will sell the future(nextyears #1/#2) to get the combo of guys that will make that happen this year RB/OL/WR/DB

Palerydr – that’s one thing I am thankful about Ruskell… he drafts character guys (like Moreno in ’09) who have track records of being good people… so when you say “individual play” stuff — if you have good people on your team, you normally don’t have to worry about those problems…

When you are morons like Buffalo, you bring the TO problems onto yourself… you add a great talent, but you add even more of a headache than they are worth…

Today/tonight is the day where I have changed my mind with our #4 pick. I have wanted Oher from day 1. Now my kool-aid is squarely on Mr. Moreno. However, that means our #2 pick must be an offensive lineman (IMO). Knowshon isn’t going to be able to do his thing to the best of his ability if he doesn’t get an Unger, Mack, or whoever to block for him…

In the same vane as Palerydr and OutSydeDog and others, I would like to see the out of control rookie pay scale addressed in the next CBA. The league and the players union could negotiate pay slots by draft position with a negotiated annual increase for inflation for the length of the CBA. If teams and agents know what the league scheduled caps are by slot, first round picks will have no need to hold out. It would also be better for league parity because it would actually be an advantage to have a top five pick. Require players to play two years on their rookie deals with an automatic franchise-type designation for the third year at which point teams can negotiate a long term deal if the player has earned it. Or teams could cut busts. This would leave more cap space for veterans so the total dollars for the players union wouldn’t be affected.

I think something like this benefits fans, players (who play well in the NFL), teams, and the league. Agents not so much, as they would not be necessary until the players second year in the NFL. Which could help college programs by making agents recruit players a little less fervently on campuses.

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.